Trump talks of/up riots

Donald Trump is widely seen as a very adept user of publicity and he has been successful at pushing political buttons and tapping into an angry electorate.

He is now talking of riots if he misses out on the republican nomination. Is he deliberately talking up riots?

NZ Herald: Donald Trump says he’ll skip debate, warns of possible convention riots

Fresh off three more primary victories, Donald Trump said he’ll blow off the next Republican presidential debate and warned of “riots” if power-brokers deny him the nomination at the convention even if he’s leading in the delegate count.

“I think we’ll win before getting to the convention, but I can tell you, if we didn’t and if we’re 20 votes short or if we’re 100 short and we’re at 1,100 and somebody else is at 500 or 400 cause we’re way ahead of everybody, I don’t think you can say that we don’t get it automatically,” Trump said on CNN on Wednesday. “I think you’d have riots.”

“I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen,” Trump said, adding the outcome would “disenfranchise” his supporters.

While Trump appears to be carefully trying to distance himself blame of riots should they happen the fact that he is publicly suggesting them as a possibility – and a justified possibility – it’s hard to believe he isn’t deliberately talking up the threat of riots, if not suggesting and encouraging them.

It could easily be seen as an insidious political threat of or incitement for violence if he doesn’t get his way.

UPDATE: Newstalk ZB is more blunt- Trump: Pick me or there will be riots

 

40 Comments

  1. Oliver

     /  March 17, 2016

    There would be riots either way wouldn’t there.

  2. Alan Wilkinson

     /  March 17, 2016

    I see the Herald is running a series of hit pieces on Trump so the media haven’t given up yet.

    • jamie

       /  March 17, 2016

      To be fair, any article containing a report of something Trump has said or done could be considered a “hit piece.”

      • kiwi guy

         /  March 17, 2016

        “It could easily be seen as an insidious political threat of or incitement for violence if he doesn’t get his way.”

        You are doing a hit job on Trump, Pete, unsurprisingly.

        It’s NOT HIS WAY, its the VOTERS WAY.

        Big difference Pete and one you don’t seem to be aware of.

        • kiwi guy

           /  March 17, 2016

          ^ reply to OP not jamie.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  March 17, 2016

          It’s not Pete who’s unaware of this, it’s Bigmouth Trump.

          • kiwi guy

             /  March 17, 2016

            What are you talking about?!!!

            Trump has won the vote, he has the most delegates, it is the voters will. GOP Establishment can only try some dirty trick at the convention, which is so brazen and crazy, riots would be expected.

            And that is not “making threats”.

  3. Kitty Catkin

     /  March 17, 2016

    He’ll be a damned fool if he does anything that can be construed as inciting a riot-goodbye, political career, it was nice knowing you.

    It’s only just dawned on me that his supporters want a president with no political experience-why on earth would anyone want that ?

    • Oliver

       /  March 17, 2016

      Maybe because they have learnt that candidates that have had political experience have been inadequate as leaders and therefore can’t be trusted.

    • kiwi guy

       /  March 17, 2016

      “goodbye, political career, it was nice knowing you.”

      Oh, please! You lot claimed he was a joke and a nothing loser when he first stepped into the ring.

      You obviously are a very slow learner.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  March 17, 2016

        Inciting a riot is a crime, I believe. It doesn’t matter who does it, it’s still a stupid move whether it’s a criminal offense or not.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  March 17, 2016

          It is indeed a crime in the USA, and he’d be an idiot to think that the law doesn’t apply to him. If he commits a crime, it will be goodbye to his political career. I’d have thought that his lawyers would have told him about this-or maybe they have, and he’s ignored them.

  4. kiwi guy

     /  March 17, 2016

    Good article on hypocrisy of those squealing “Fashist!” at Trump:

    “The core belief of the Establishment is the central state should run everything.
    If you’re an Establishment insider, the mainstream media will give you plenty of column inches and airtime to label Donald Trump a “dangerous” fascist: for example, Democratic insider Robert Reich’s fear-mongering frenzy Donald Trump is a 21st century American fascist, in which Reich conveniently overlooks constitutional limits on any president, “fascist” or not…

    …It is of course classic Orwellian Doublespeak to label any threat to one’s power “fascist,” and to laud one’s corrupt and venal allies as “freedom fighters,” but the Establishment’s panicked reliance on accusations of fascism is new and yes, dangerous. So let’s step back and ask–precisely who’s the fascist here?”

    http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.co.nz/2016/03/wait-minute-whos-fascist.html

    • Joe Bloggs

       /  March 17, 2016

      Sorry, but can you run that past me once more?

      It is of course classic Orwellian Doublespeak to label any threat to one’s power “fascist,”

      There is both irony and hypocrisy in you referring to other people’s use of the label ‘fascist’ as Orwellian doublespeak when you use the expression so freely to describe people whose views you disagree with.

      Or does your cutesy misspelling ‘fashist’ somehow legitimise your particular use of the label?

      • kiwi guy

         /  March 17, 2016

        Where do I freely call people “fashist!”? I might flip it back in the face of a Progressive to point out their Totalitarian mind set.

        I call Progressives “Marxists” or “Stalinists” with justification, as their ideology is Marxist derived and I have documented example after example of Progressives trying to shut down free speech and enforce their program on the Western population.

        And notice I say “Marxist derived”, while shockingly there are actual old school Marxist, most Progressives are following a modified version – constantly being adjusted because Marxism is such a failure of an ideology they have to keep going back to the drawing board.

        • Joe Bloggs

           /  March 17, 2016

          Where do I freely call people “fashist!”?

          That’s not quite what I said, but nevertheless, you asked so I shall respond:

          Feb 14, 2016 – Godwin unwelcome (you use the label 5 times in 5 posts to characterise the comments of Rob and his “Marxist comrades”)

          Feb 11, 2016 – What distinguishes the left from the right? (you use the label twice in two comments to characterise “Millennial Progressive Twitter/Tumblr keyboard warriors”)

          Feb 9, 2016 – Josie Butler and her squeaky toy

          Dost thee discern a pattern emerging, M’Lud?

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  March 17, 2016

            (whispers) Dost thou discern a pattern. Not that KG would know the difference. I seemed to remember his overuse of the word (if fashist is a word-but you know what I mean) as that silly spelling draws attention to it. KG never knows when something’s been done to death.

            • Joe Bloggs

               /  March 17, 2016

              Dost thee? Dost thou? Thanks KCK for your erudition. I leave older and wiser! 🙂

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  March 17, 2016

              I thank thee for that, Joe. It’s waste of time to reply to KG, it just encourages him as thou wilt discover.

            • kiwi guy

               /  March 17, 2016

              “I seemed to remember his overuse of the word (if fashist is a word-but you know what I mean) ”

              I used it as illustrative of a Progressive accusation.

              That you believe I go around calling Progressives “fascists” all the time is bizarre but not surprising given your low low intellectual abilities.

              I can’t believe I am having to explain this to you.

          • kiwi guy

             /  March 17, 2016

            Why do NONE of your quotes include ANY where I allegedly call Leftist “fashists” or “fascists”?

            You are lying.

            I call Progressives “Stalinists” or “Marxists” or “Cultural Marxists” which is entirely justified for reasons I have already pointed out.

            I don’t call Progressives “Fascist”, except maybe very rarely when I want to flip their hypocrisy back on them. I use the term “fashists!” as an example of THEIR type of accusation.

            • Joe Bloggs

               /  March 17, 2016

              Oh you slay me KG!!!: ‘I don’t call Progressive fashists except when I call them fashists’

            • jamie

               /  March 17, 2016

              Has it ever occurred to you that you get labelled a fascist because you are constantly promoting fascist ideas?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  March 17, 2016

              Probably not 😀

  5. Joe Bloggs

     /  March 17, 2016

    While we’re bandying about commentaries on American politics, here’s another perspective on Trumpery and the modern fascist movement in America:

    http://www.salon.com/2016/03/11/trumps_not_hitler_hes_mussolini_how_gop_anti_intellectualism_created_a_modern_fascist_movement_in_america/

    • kiwi guy

       /  March 17, 2016

      Salon was in on the Virginia Uni rape hoax – it is a Progressive Dildo propaganda rag.

      • Joe Bloggs

         /  March 17, 2016

        In on the hoax?

        Sabrina Erdley from Rolling Stone may have been ‘in on the hoax’ but I don’t recall her article being co-authored by Salon (the only way that Salon could be ‘in on the hoax’). What I recall was Salon commenting on the ethics of gang rape journalism, and Rolling Stone’s refusal to do the dirty work of verifying its claims, after the veracity of Erdley’s writing was questioned.

        I ask myself whether you have evidence for your claim. or whether this is just an opportunity for another of your hoary old memes. By the way, that’s not an invitation to reply with another of your “sniveling little clueless Leftist, 3rd World Vibrant, giant rainbow coloured dildo, Cultural Marxist, Progressive Dildocracy, rabid Feminist political lynch mob” memes.

        Irrespective of your disinterest in Salon, the article draws many parallels between Trump and Mussolini and makes a fascinating (one might even say ‘vibrant’) read.

        If it has a weakness it is that the author doesn’t relate his view of fascism to other political institutions in American history, such as, for example, the Klan as a restorationist movement of the Confederacy, or the fascistic campaign run over the past 30 years by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh to whip up a froth of hatred of government and politics in principle.

        Nevertheless, the parallels are there: Trump’s fervent anti-intellectualism, his taming of the mood of anti-politics, his whipping up of emotion over reason, singling out minorities, the theatre of Trump’s rallies … action over politics, eh?

        • kiwi guy

           /  March 17, 2016

          “after the veracity of Erdley’s writing was questioned.”

          Ha ha, you let the cat out of the bag.

          Who questioned the man haters liesy? Masculinists and rightwingers.

          The Left media including Salon joined the lynch mob with wild abandon believing a hoax because it fits their Progressive narrative – white straight men are evil oppressing rapists sob! sob! The they went into denial about it, back peddlng furiously while still trying to desperately maintain that Campus rape epidemic was a thing and not the result of the feverish imaginations of lesbians feminists and their Progressive media enablers.

          Go search Salon for articles related to that rape hoax, they were on board till the bitter end.

          Feminists academics demonstrate appallingly low academic standards – “Gender Studies”, “Queer Theory”? LOL.

          Feminists whip up emotions over reason “RAPE FEAR RAPE FEAR RAPE RAPE!”.

          Feminists single out minorities – white heterosexual males are rapists and class oppressors!

          Actions over politics, eh?

          • What has this got to do with Trump talking up riots?

            • Gezza

               /  March 17, 2016

              Might be some (very) tenuous connection to Pussy Riot perhaps? 😎
              But probably not.

            • kiwi guy

               /  March 17, 2016

              If you bothered to follow the posts back up you would see I was responding to a poster who thinks Salon is a great source of info.

              I merely point out that Salon was up to its balls in the Virginia Rape Hoax, being the Progressive propaganda mouthpiece it is.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  March 17, 2016

              In other words, Pete…nothing at all.

              I don’t know why KG does more or less the same spiel about any topic. Black lesbian Marxists. man-hating feminists, migrants, leftists….

    • kiwi guy

       /  March 17, 2016

      Good work, Wilkinson, not that the Progressive haters on here will bother to inform themselves about it.

      • Gezza

         /  March 17, 2016

        I think it highly likely Trump will end up the democratic candidate. Attacks on him just don’t score any hits.

        • Gezza

           /  March 17, 2016

          Oops lol the republican candidate I meant. Well, who knows, maybe he’ll score some dem votes as well.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  March 17, 2016

            If he can be done for inciting a riot, he could well be in a big house quite different to the one he hopes to be in-and irony of ironies, be disenfranchised to boot. The US laws are very specific about what constitutes this.

            • Gezza

               /  March 17, 2016

              He’s too rat-cunning to be caught out using terms that would specifically constitute inciting a riot.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  March 18, 2016

              He’s so vain and conceited that he may be hoist with his own petard and think that the laws that apply to lesser beings don’t apply to him. His parents should have called him Ozymandias.